In today's world,
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yevgenia Dudka occupies a central place in our lives. Whether it is politics, technology, history, or any other area of interest,
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yevgenia Dudka is a topic that sparks the interest and curiosity of millions of people around the world. In this article, we will explore different aspects related to
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yevgenia Dudka, delving into its relevance, its impact on society, and the different perspectives that can be had on this topic. From its origins to its evolution today,
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yevgenia Dudka has been the subject of debate, reflection and analysis, and through this article we will seek to shed light on various aspects that surround it.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. Salvio giuliano 18:59, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
- Yevgenia Dudka (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails GNG, BASIC, ANYBIO. Article is a 1E BIO. Wikipedia is not a memorial site. Sources in article are routine, and do not show notability beyond 1E. BEFORE showed nothing more. If anyone finds IS RS with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth showing this is not a 1E, ping me // Timothy :: talk 18:11, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Ukraine. Shellwood (talk) 18:41, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- Delete - sadly, just a soldier and a victim of war. Her rank is not a point of notability, nor is anything within the article indicative of such. There is a stark lack of establishing a notability throughout, and leaving the article open for improvements will never change this. Ref (chew)(do) 19:13, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- Delete - Not notable. ImperialMajority (talk) 19:47, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- ImperialMajority, yes, this article should probably be deleted, but I have removed the first sentence of that statement. The WP:BLP policy applies everywhere, not just in articles, and that is a clear breach. Phil Bridger (talk) 22:50, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Comment. I didn't like the comment at all and I thought it was WP:IDL, but she is not living, so I don't think BLP applies. CT55555(talk) 23:33, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- WP:BLP applies to the recently deceased as well as the living. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:24, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
- I did not know that. Thanks for pointing that out. Apologies for my error. CT55555(talk) 21:28, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 21:41, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- Comment. How User:TimothyBlue, doe she fail WP:ANYBIO, when she has a Order for Courage. That seems like a pass of criterion 1. CT55555(talk) 00:01, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Reply: She received the third class of the award, which is a sixth level award from Hero of Ukraine. ANYBIO states "People are likely to be notable" if they have received; if this passes ANYBIO (I don't think it does), the subject is still only "likely" to be notable, ANYBIO does even use the word presumed. In this case the award is connected to 1E, there are no other sources showing notability and ANYBIO doesn't provide any exception from notability guidelines, it simply says they are "likely" to be notable.
- No objection to a merge and redirect to an article about the event per 1E, if the article is created and has sources showing notability.
- I have added the information and references from uk wikipedia to the article. // Timothy :: talk 00:45, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Delete. WP:NOTMEMORIAL. Nothing noteworthy about her service. WP:ANYBIO criterion 1 "a well-known and significant award" is usually held to mean the nation's highest award. Order for Courage (3rd grade) is not. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:20, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Reply: this leaves me confused about how to vote. Clearly you've bee doing this for a while so I trust your comment. And yet "the nation's highest" seems like a much higher bar than "well-known and significant". I'm now wondering what obligation there is on me to run with tradition or my own reading of the guidance. That said, I don't actually know how well known the award is, I just see it made the news. I think I'll watch how the conversation progresses and stay out until/unless I gain a better understanding. CT55555(talk) 01:19, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Mztourist (talk) 09:17, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
- Delete. This article fails WP:GNG and WP:BASIC, an example of WP:NOTMEMORIAL. An additional take is that any claim to notability by satisfying WP:ANYBIO isn’t actually satisfied by the nature of the the award. Shawn Teller (talk) 15:06, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.